Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IVV vs QTUM: how they differ
Over the year QTUM returned more, +50.4% against +17.6%, and IVV charges 0.03% against 0.40%.
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF and Defiance Quantum ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IVV and QTUM hold 17% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IVV | QTUM |
|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Corp. | 4.30% | 1.48% |
| Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | 1.47% | 1.36% |
| Micron Technology, Inc. | 2.02% | 1.30% |
| NVIDIA Corp. | 7.52% | 1.30% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. | 3.62% | 1.28% |
| Broadcom, Inc. | 2.77% | 1.16% |
| Alphabet, Inc. | 3.25% | 1.13% |
| Intel Corp. | 1.02% | 1.14% |
| Applied Materials, Inc. | 0.89% | 1.09% |
| Lam Research Corp. | 0.84% | 1.10% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. | 0.72% | 1.12% |
| KLA Corp. | 0.61% | 1.01% |
| Only in IVV | Only in QTUM |
|---|---|
| Apple, Inc. 6.59% | Arqit Quantum Inc 1.82% |
| Alphabet, Inc. 2.59% | Global Unichip Corp 1.82% |
| Meta Platforms, Inc. 1.92% | Horizon Quantum Holdings Ltd 1.81% |
| Tesla, Inc. 1.84% | Cloudflare Inc 1.66% |
| Eli Lilly & Co. 1.47% | Elastic Nv 1.63% |
| Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. 1.42% | Snowflake Inc 1.63% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. 1.36% | Nutanix Inc 1.58% |
| Johnson & Johnson 0.95% | Radnet Inc 1.54% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Sep 14, 2026.
| IVV iShares Core S&P 500 ETF | QTUM Defiance Quantum ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Thematic ETF |
| Issuer | iShares | Defiance |
| What it is | S&P 500 | Quantum computing |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.6% | +50.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +0.1 pts | +32.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.40% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 100.0% | 34.8% |
| Holdings | 504 | 89 |
IVV in plain words
IVV is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 504 positions, with the top ten at 36.4%.
QTUM in plain words
By weight, 35% of QTUM's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 83%. The top ten holdings are 17% of the fund across 89 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 14, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned +50.4% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 32.9 pts. It sits 12.5% below its all-time high of Jun 2, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IVV or QTUM?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IVV returned +17.6% and QTUM returned +50.4%, so QTUM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IVV or QTUM?
- IVV charges 0.03% a year and QTUM charges 0.40%, so IVV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IVV and QTUM overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 100% of IVV and 35% of QTUM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 17% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.
- Are IVV and QTUM the same kind of fund?
- No. IVV is an index ETF and QTUM is a thematic ETF, so they are built for different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and what each actually holds.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IVV against QTUM, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IVV-QTUM Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources